The issue that just will not go away

A letter to the Financial Times from GM Simon of Moreton in Marsh drew attention to the favourable comment in the paper on the view of the former US ambassador to the United Nations, Richard Holbrooke, that "the EU is mind-numbing in its bureaucracy, arrogant, undemocratic and unaccountable".

Mr Simon responded: "Those of us who say much the same have been described in the Financial Times as xenophobic Little Englanders and generally unwashed, at least intellectually."

Not all readers of the FT are Europhiles, despite the stance of the newspaper. The Conservatives might take heart, were they not distracted by contemplating their own navels.

The election campaign that isn't, because the election has not been called, rolls on, with Labour in some indecision about policy over foot and mouth disease and the Conservatives in some disarray about who leads the party, or whether it is being led at all.

It is a true test of the robustness of the issue, even its importance, that Europe and the euro will not go away, come bank holiday or disease, parliamentary recess or phoney election campaign.

With the institutions of Europe quiet over Easter, and little opportunity for the Eurosceptic media to parade further examples of European intrusiveness, silliness or creeping federalism, the Tories on the one hand and the heavyweight Europhile commentators on the other have made the running.

The FT, again, pointed to the Tories' inability to avoid filling the news vacuum so deliberately created by the government. "While Labour ministers have headed off for unscheduled holidays, the Tories have dominated the news," the paper reported.

Labour had largely closed down its media operation and simply stood aside to "avoid distracting attention from their opponents' misfortunes". These had in cluded renewed leadership speculation, failure to find a brand that could win back voters, warnings to candidates against using racist language and disputes over political strategy.

And yes, Europe does lie at the heart of all this. Senior Tories, most notably the friends of Michael Portillo, were already sorting out the succession to William Hague in anticipation of an ignominious election defeat, and suggesting the unlikely alliance of Kenneth Clarke and Mr Portillo to create a broad Tory coalition with a more electable face.

Donald Macintyre, in the Independent expected Mr Hague to fight a "risky campaign even more focused on the euro than previously thought". It would be an overt "save the pound election". The attraction of this, according to Macintyre, was that opposition to the euro was more popular than the Tory party, and the approach "could embarrass a Labour party sworn to keep the single currency as low profile as possible".

If Mr Hague did better than expected, he might be secure, but if not, the strategy of narrowly focusing on the euro would have been shown not to have worked. A euro referendum would thus be more likely. And Macintyre pointed out that no longer could it be assumed that the referendum would kill the single currency as an issue, because there was now a growing band of Tories determined to fight on to reverse a referendum result that went against them.

Put all this together and the impact on the euro debate of the Tories' election strategy - or Mr Hague's survival tactics - becomes highly significant. As Macintyre said: "If there is another rout, it will be a defeat not only for a leader but for a strategy. And that will change a great deal in politics, not least the prospects for British entry into the single currency."

Hugo Young in the Guardian, describing the Conservative party as out of control and "careering into the far blue yonder", also considered the alleged Portillo-Clarke alliance and the impact for the EU of present disarray. The only hope for a political future for the present Tory party lay in a "no" vote in the euro referendum, said Young. Like Macintyre, he has discerned the growing number of Tories who would reject a referendum "yes" and engage in "an unending struggle to repudiate it". These Tories were also in favour of further referendums to "realign the entire British membership of the EU".

This could lead to legitimising an exit from the EU if the British did not get what they want, said Young, and some in the shadow cabinet were happy to contemplate this. He was uncertain how far Mr Portillo would go along with this strategy, but he "seems to loathe the EU" and is "obviously not to be trusted".

Young advised pro-Europe Tories to ignore Mr Portillo and run their own candidate in a future leadership election. "They owe it to their own conviction to the case they are about to make, that Hague lost the 2001 election because his Euroscepticism helped ruin his credibility as a national leader. They also owe it to the referendum result they want." For all those reasons, said Young, Tory pro-Euros should not help a party led by Mr Portillo, but leave, and thus destroy one led by Iain Duncan Smith.